Did you watch President Bush's interview on ABC last night

Originally posted by elevatedone
I just read through the transcript... I think it was edited... I cannot find the exact statement that I was looking for, but did find these ....


The best day of my presidency was when I was sworn in as President and � because it gave me a chance to assume this high office and implement a strategy that would make the world more peaceful and more free and a country more compassionate. That's so far been the best day of my presidency.

When I heard him stutter through that, I almost fell outta my chair laughing.

The other day a wise older friend asked me, "Do you know why Bush can't speak without stumbling?"
I said, "Cause he doesn't know his arse from a hole in the ground?"
He said, "No. It's because he's lying."

I do believe my friend is dead on the money.

Originally posted by Valhall

Originally posted by Bout Time
...or more specifically, how Dim Son has me cursing, without fail, everytime his mug is on TV.

Hey, buck up. I lived through 8 years of this with Clinton, you can survive.

It must have been painful!

Let's start a bi-partisan thread: "the most revolting Poli/Social figure to watch"

I think Tom DeLay is up there, same with Trent Lott and Al Sharpton! i like Arlene Specter, but he creeps me out sometimes!

Hey, buck up. I lived through 8 years of this with Clinton, you can survive.

I think all politicians are lying cheating whores who pander to big corporations but at least you could find a job when Clinton was in office. Also was not paying 52% taxes when Clinton was in and also some of our money went for social programs to help people currently all those programs have been cut, also there was not the large dificit to pay for so in reality I long for those days horrible Clinton days and wish he could run again.

Originally posted by Valhall

Originally posted by Bout Time
...or more specifically, how Dim Son has me cursing, without fail, everytime his mug is on TV.

Hey, buck up. I lived through 8 years of this with Clinton, you can survive.

Gawd! After 8 years of Klinton, I was so looking forward to what I had hoped to be a more principled administration. So I voted for the Shrub. It was the dumbest thing I ever did.

Is that you now do the research you should have done going into the 2000 vote!!

Originally posted by Bout Time
Is that you now do the research you should have done going into the 2000 vote!!

Man, I just couldn't vote for Gore.

I watched as much as I could bear. It was quite funny to hear him talk; thinking he is actually in control and knows what he's doing. It was just too much, as always he only made a fool of himself.

On another note, the democrates are pussys. Gawd, if they have to take a step back becuase Saddam was caught, they shouldn't be seeking office. I don't like mos of 'em, but Dean is more appealing than Bush.

Originally posted by cursedag
I watched as much as I could bear. It was quite funny to hear him talk; thinking he is actually in control and knows what he's doing.

It was just too much, as always he only made a fool of himself.

On another note, the democrates are pussys. Gawd, if they have to take a step back becuase Saddam was caught, they shouldn't be seeking office. I don't like mos of 'em, but Dean is more appealing than Bush.

Talk about not keeping track of their lies. Dean is the worst at it. How is Dean more appealing than Bush? I've never seen an appealing politician that ever got elected to anything.

Dean is articulate and can think on his feet. He has no need for handlers to shepherd what he says. He's also an outsider, which is in his favor. He is also far less liberal than many people think. The establishment media has gone out of their bipartisan way to paint him incorrectly because the democrats AND republicans are both afraid of him. He is not the establishment's annointed one. And if the American people would actually pull their heads outta their arse and think for themselves, he could beat George W. Bush handily. Bush is a retard and would be chewed up and spit out by Dean in a real debate.

If the election was held tomorrow, I would vote for Dean. And I have NEVER voted for a democrat EVER.

What struck me the most was when Bush was being questioned about the WMDs that Saddam definitely had. He completely dodged the question and got pissed when Diane pushed it. If there really is confirmed evidence of WMDs in Iraq, I would imagine that Bush would be aware of it. He at least could have said that there is information that supports the claim, but that cannot be released for security reasons or something to that effect. Anything to indicate that he had told the truth. Instead, he just kept repeating that everyone was safer since Saddam had been removed. Which, while true, is not justification for a pre-emptive war to prevent existing WMDs from being used.

DIANE SAWYER: Fifty percent of the American people have said that they think the administration exaggerated the evidence going into the war with Iraq, weapons of mass destruction, connection to terrorism. Are the American people wrong? Misguided?

PRESIDENT BUSH: The intelligence I operated one was good sound intelligence, the same intelligence that my predecessor operated on. The � there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein was a threat. The � otherwise the United Nations might � wouldn't a passed, you know, resolution after resolution after resolution, demanding that he disarm... And so for the sake of peace and for the sake of freedom of the Iraqi people, for the sake of security of the country, and for the sake of the credibility of institu � in � international institutions, a group of us moved, and the world is better for it.

DIANE SAWYER: But let me try to ask � this could be a long question. ... ... When you take a look back, Vice President Cheney said there is no doubt, Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction, not programs, not intent. There is no doubt he has weapons of mass destruction. Secretary Powell said 100 to 500 tons of chemical weapons and now the inspectors say that there's no evidence of these weapons existing right now. The yellow cake in Niger, in Niger. George Tenet has said that shouldn't have been in your speech. Secretary Powell talked about mobile labs. Again, the intelligence � the inspectors have said they can't confirm this, they can't corroborate.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yet.

DIANE SAWYER: � an active �

PRESIDENT BUSH: Yet.

and

DIANE SAWYER: But stated as a hard fact, that there were weapons of mass destruction as opposed to the possibility that he could move to acquire those weapons still �

PRESIDENT BUSH: So what's the difference?

DIANE SAWYER: Well �

PRESIDENT BUSH: The possibility that he could acquire weapons. If he were to acquire weapons, he would be the danger. That's, that's what I'm trying to explain to you. A gathering threat, after 9/11, is a threat that needed to be de � dealt with, and it was done after 12 long years of the world saying the man's a danger. And so we got rid of him and there's no doubt the world is a safer, freer place as a result of Saddam being gone.


And then there's this statement, which appears to say, that while David Kay and the US had information to prove a breach in Resolution 1441, the UN was not supplied with that information.

DIANE SAWYER: Is it yet?

PRESIDENT BUSH: But what David Kay did discover was they had a weapons program, and had that, that � let me finish for a second. Now it's more extensive than, than missiles. Had that knowledge been examined by the United Nations or had David Kay's report been placed in front of the United Nations, he, he, Saddam Hussein, would have been in material breach of 1441, which meant it was a causis belli (cause for war). And look, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein was a dangerous person, and there's no doubt we had a body of evidence proving that, and there is no doubt that the president must act, after 9/11, to make America a more secure country.

There's a body of evidence to prove that lots of people in power, including Bush, are dangerous people. I don't think being a dangerous person is grounds for one country to invade and take control over another country.

DIANE SAWYER: What would it take to convince you he didn't have weapons of mass destruction?
PRESIDENT BUSH: Saddam Hussein was a threat and the fact that he is gone means America is a safer country.

I don't think that's an answer to her question. Is it?

DIANE SAWYER: And if he doesn't have weapons of mass destruction [inaudible] �

PRESIDENT BUSH: Diane, you can keep asking the question. I'm telling you � I made the right decision for America � because Saddam Hussein used weapons of mass destruction, invaded Kuwait. ... But the fact that he is not there is, means America's a more secure country.

I guess it doesn't matter anymore if they find WMDs, it is only important that we removed Saddam from power. So why did they have to tell Congress that there was eminent danger of attack by Iraq, in order to get support for going to war? Wouldn't telling them how dangerous he was be sufficient?

Bush is a lying automaton.

And yeah, he almost busted his buttons when she asked him a real question. They shoulda done what they normally do in those situations, give a xanex before he speaks.

I still read this and can't help but thinking...

the two phrases that I noticed most, sounded to me like he was referring to NWO..

because it gave me a chance to assume this high office and implement a strategy that would make the world more peaceful and more free and a country more compassionate.




My confidence comes from a lot of sources.

And that's powerful. It's hard for me to describe to you what that means. It's � let me just say this: It's a leap of faith to understand. . I'm confident because I've got assembled a great team.

... I'm confident in my management style. I'm a delegator because I trust the people I've asked to join the team. I'm willing to delegate. That makes it easier to be president. ...



is this NOW or what ?

He so stumbled and bumbled through that answer. I swear, I cringe when I listen to him. He stumbles because he's got to always remember exactly what NOT to say.

I love to watch him on TV while giving speeches. He always has that "smirk", especially when talking about the war or terrorist... I think it's funny.

My gal says that he reminds her of a preacher giving a sermon.

I agree, he has to remember what not to say most of the time..

"we'll track those terrorist down and bring them to the NWO, or ummm I mean justice"

What really got me was how happy he seemed, how hard he tried to keep from smirking and smiling when discussing wishing Saddam's execution. I thought that was downright sadistic and very telling.